Politically correct terrorism

David Kupelian is an award-winning journalist, vice president and managing editor of WND, editor of Whistleblower magazine and widely read columnist. He is also the best-selling author of "The Marketing of Evil" (2005), "How Evil Works" (2010) and most recently, “The Snapping of the American Mind” (2015). Follow him on Facebook.

But not because of any lack of military might or intelligence capability, nor even because of any unwillingness to sustain grievous human and financial losses.

No, America is in danger of losing this war because of political correctness.

Answer me this: If we can’t identify who the enemy is – and, in fact, refuse to do so – haven’t we lost already?

The news media, the filter through which Americans receive their information, is reluctant to define the enemy. Indeed, within the last week, it has become politically incorrect to describe the Islamic terrorists who blew up the World Trade Center and Pentagon, murdering thousands of innocent Americans, as “Islamic terrorists.”

As the Washington Times reported, “an organization of religion news reporters yesterday suggested that reporters avoid the term ‘Islamic terrorist’ or similar labels as Muslims and their beliefs receive greater scrutiny. The Religion Newswriters Association said it was ‘troubled’ by the frequent use of the term in the days after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.” At its annual meeting last week, the group adopted a resolution also rejecting “similar phrases that associate an entire religion with the action of a few.”

OK, but at least we can still call them terrorists, right?

Wrong.

Stephen Jukes, Reuters’ global head of news, decreed that the giant wire service’s 2,500 journalists should not use the T-word unless in a direct quote.

“We all know that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter and that Reuters upholds the principle that we do not use the word terrorist,” he wrote in an internal memo. “To be frank, it adds little to call the attack on the World Trade Center a terrorist attack.”

Attempting to explain his values-neutral approach, Jukes added: “We’re trying to treat everyone on a level playing field, however tragic it’s been and however awful and cataclysmic for the American people and people around the world.”

So former Reagan staffer and columnist Paul Craig Roberts was right when he observed recently that “Americans might be so politically correct and racially sensitive as to be unable to deal with the problem at all.”

And yet, as America’s experience in Vietnam proved, widespread public support is critical for a successful campaign, especially a long, difficult and costly campaign, as the forthcoming war promises to be. Hard to garner support if the press doesn’t tell us who the enemy is.

But the news media don’t prosecute the war – the government does. So, how are our leaders doing in defining the enemy?

“Islam is a religion of peace,” we are told, and these terrorists – oops, I guess I should say, these folks – are just some bad apples that belong to a widely dispersed “terror network” of a few hundred or even a few thousand members – who have “hijacked” Islam in order to philosophically justify their murderous hatred of the West.

But as Mideast expert Daniel Pipes wrote this week, “The president dismissed al-Qaida’s version of Islam as a repudiated ‘fringe form of Islamic extremism.’ Hardly. Muslims on the streets of many places – Pakistan and Gaza in particular – are fervently rallying to the defense of al-Qaida’s vision of Islam. Likewise, the president’s calling the terrorists ‘traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam’ implies that other Muslims see them as apostates, which is simply wrong. Al-Qaida enjoys wide popularity – the very best the U.S. government can hope for is a measure of Muslim neutrality and apathy.”

Although without question there are millions of peaceful, tolerant and decent Muslims, what we’re talking about here is a particular brand of Islam — a rapidly expanding one at that — often called “Islamism.” Like communism and Nazism, it is a brutal, coercive utopian movement bent on nothing less than total world domination. It’s what President Bush described, in his excellent Sept. 20 speech to the nation, as heir “of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century … they follow in the path of fascism, and Nazism, and totalitarianism.” Yes, the president, to his credit, characterized the enemy correctly, albeit briefly and incompletely. But he gave no sense of the size of the enemy.

Take a deep breath. Of the world’s approximately 1.2 billion Muslims, an estimated 10 to 15 percent are of the militant “Islamist” strain. Do the math – that’s well over 100 million human beings who, to a greater or lesser degree, are caught up with what amounts to the world’s most dangerous cult.

Paul Marshall, senior fellow at the Center for Religious Freedom at Freedom House, told this writer that right now perhaps eight to 10 governments are “scared of being toppled” if they stand up to the Islamic “jihad” against the West. Citing Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Jordan, Indonesia and other potential “coalition” members, Marshall said such states “are afraid their country could be destabilized if they support the West too much, which shows that opposition to American action is not simply from a few hundred people.”

By the way, if you want to truly understand what America is up against, who the enemy really is – in-depth – you should read the upcoming issue of WND’s “Whistleblower” magazine. This extra-large issue, titled “JIHAD: The radical Islamic threat to America,” will be devoted from cover to cover to a groundbreaking exploration of America’s most mysterious, and deadly, enemy.

Now that we’ve talked a bit about what we’re up against, let’s think about political correctness, that bizarre self-censorship that currently makes us afraid even to name the enemy, let alone fight it.

Political correctness, at its core, is intimidation. Terrorism, of course, is the ultimate in intimidation.

The militant Islamic movement – as opposed to peaceful Muslims – wants to intimidate the United States, to intimidate us out of the Middle East so it can destroy Israel, take over the so-called “moderate” states, especially Saudi Arabia, ushering in a unified and radicalized Islamic state throughout the Mideast, and control the world’s oil. Oil is a powerful weapon.

Then, they can destroy America in their own good time – remember, it is central to their politicized, utopian, religious beliefs that they convert the entire world to Islam – by force, if necessary.

But how can America withstand such intimidation when we have already given in to seemingly far less threatening intimidators in recent times?

We have given in to the militant homosexual movement – not the live-and-let-live homosexual who wants to be left alone to live his or her life – but the radical strain of homosexual activism that wants to force a repugnant agenda down our throats – to teach kindergartners about perverted sex, make AIDS exempt from normal infectious-disease protocols and outlaw traditional Christian teaching on homosexuality as a “hate crime.”

The militant women’s movement – not your normal women’s activists seeking equal pay for equal work, but the extremist wing – intimidated America into allowing women in combat, unlimited abortion-on-demand, no-fault divorce, and driving millions of mothers into the workforce who really would rather have stayed home and raised their children.

The militant civil-rights movement – not Martin Luther King who championed a color-blind society, with which most Americans heartily agree – but the radical, virulent strain, the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world, brought us forced bussing, reverse discrimination, endless hypocrisy and increased, not decreased, racial hatreds.

And Americans have been so intimidated by their own government that, just a few months ago, President George W. Bush had to stump across the nation, begging outrageously overtaxed Americans to accept a tax cut, so fearful and brainwashed are so many of us of losing some perceived government benefit.

If America is to have any chance of prevailing in this war – which is not only a military conflict, but a cultural and spiritual one as well – we in the Free World have to come to grips with Islam. But to do so, we first have to come to grips with ourselves. We must become virtuous. We must become courageous. We must become self-disciplined, mature and uncompromisingly honest. And we must throw political correctness onto “the unmarked grave” of history. If we do, we can address with a clear head and a pure heart the spiritual warfare in which, ready or not, we are now engaged.

For the truth is, there is no clean distinction between “good Islam” on one side and “bad Islam” on the other. There is, rather, a continuum. Take the estimated four to seven million Muslims in the U.S.A. At one end, and clearly this constitutes the majority, you have the peaceful Muslim family living down the street that obeys our laws, pays their taxes and are proud to be Americans. But since Sept. 11, we have learned that, while we were asleep in this country — with our borders wide open, giving high-technology to our enemies — an unknown number of terrorists also have set up shop in America, along with their supporters, sympathizers, apologists and funders.

In between these two types of Muslims – the loyal American and the enemy – you have many degrees of dissatisfaction and outright anger at the United States of America, of sympathy for Palestinian suicide bombers, of secret and sometimes open agreement with the Sept. 11 attacks and, in some cases, of actual cooperation with America’s enemies. There is a great deal more to this adversary than meets the eye.

America’s job is to utterly destroy – that means kill – the terrorist network, root and branch, and likewise to destroy the governments of the terrorists’ patron states. If we do this just right, with the right spirit and timing, we may just succeed in shocking those millions of future Osama bin Ladens who today are following the siren song of militant Islam, and forcing them toward the more moderate end of the spectrum.

To accomplish such a Herculean task will take nothing less than God’s intervention. And to receive such help from above, we must look to Him with all our heart, soul, mind and strength.